[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#26091: Add pkg-config file for libidn2

From: Marius Bakke
Subject: bug#26091: Add pkg-config file for libidn2
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 19:00:10 +0100
User-agent: Notmuch/0.24 ( Emacs/25.1.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)

Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello!
> Marius Bakke <address@hidden> skribis:
>> On 'core-updates', software such as 'wget' and 'ffmpeg' are unable to
>> find 'gnutls', which is really due to libidn2 not having a pkg-config
>> file.
>> This patch adds one.
>> From 581ad41626a951b6a69e32f15f89275c7a9093e4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Marius Bakke <address@hidden>
>> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 21:20:56 +0100
>> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: libidn2: Create 'pkg-config' file.
>> * gnu/packages/libidn.scm (libidn2)[arguments]: Add phase creating 
>> libidn2.pc.
> If upstream libidn2 does not install libidn2.pc, then I’m rather against
> adding it.  It’s a decision for upstream to make.
> So it looks like the GnuTLS maintainer uses a distro that precisely
> added libidn2.pc.  I would suggest “fixing” gnutls.pc by not requiring
> libidn2.

Apparently upstream added a "libidn2.pc" recently, so this would only be
a temporary workaround until 0.17 is released:

Would omitting "libidn2" from GnuTLS' "Requires.private" also mean that
we have to add "-llibidn2" to "Libs.private"?

I think I prefer adding a pkg-config file (especially when temporary)
to a complicated string substitution on "gnutls.pc". But no strong
opinion really.. If you think patching gnutls.pc is better, go ahead! :)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]